All
| TITLE | Jeonju District Court Gunsan Branch Decision 2022Gadan53691 Decided December 7, 2023: Final 【Compensation for Damages (Other)】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 Party A, through the intermediation of Party B, a licensed real estate agent, entered into a purchase and sales contract with Party C and others regarding land and superstructures, and completed the registration of the transfer of ownership. Subsequently, Party A sought damages from Party C and others for deceptive behavior and preliminary liability of the seller for defects, claiming that Party C knew that the warehouses located on the property were illegal buildings that had been extended without permission but did not inform Party A of this fact, resulting in damages for demolition and new construction costs and additional payment of acquisition tax. Party A sought tort damages against Party B for breach of the duty of explanation regarding the brokerage object. In turn, Party A sought liability against the Korea Association of Realestators pursuant to its deductible agreement with Party B. In light of the circumstances, as it is difficult to believe both that Party C and others breached their duty of disclosure in good faith in the real estate transaction, and the object of the purchase and sales contract was defective, Party A's claims against Party C and others are all without merit. Although it is acknowledged that Party B breached its duty of explanation, it cannot be said that Party A actually suffered damages, such as the cost of demolishing the warehouses and building a new building, and the amount of the difference in acquisition tax that Party A allegedly incurred constitutes damages, or even if it does, it cannot be said to be causally related to Party B's breach of its duty of explanation. Accordingly, Party A's claims against Party B and the Korea Association of Realestators are also without merit. | |
